CSNbbs

This guy gets pretty close - his main ingredient is bad parenting.

Dixie,

did you watch the entire video???

I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

(09-14-2014 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

Never figured you for an atheist

(09-14-2014 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

GTS - I'm not looking to debate. I am curious as to your general thoughts on how we all got here.

Free Will,... But parenting is the key. But at the end,...this is a zero sum game.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-14-2014 09:31 PM)South Carolina Duke Wrote: [ -> ]Free Will,... But parenting is the key. But at the end,...this is a zero sum game.

Zero sum? I'm not sure how that would apply here. Do you believe that only a certain number of people get into heaven?

Parents will be held accountable, primarily Fathers. We are to be the " Watchmen " for the family.

"Easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle". Only believers will enter through the Gates of Pearl. Zero Sum Game.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-14-2014 09:28 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

GTS - I'm not looking to debate. I am curious as to your general thoughts on how we all got here.

Evolution, it's as good a theory as any and one that I believe in. But you can also ask a person of faith how God got here.

(09-14-2014 09:28 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

GTS - I'm not looking to debate. I am curious as to your general thoughts on how we all got here.

There is an abundance of evidence showing the classical biology "tree of life" with species/classifications/groups/etc all branching off from a single source and branching and branching. The fossil record isn't complete by any means ... but it, along with DNA, already paints a pretty vivid picture of the tree of life. Where science lacks direct evidence is the first step where something became able to replicate itself from nothing. And hey -- cut science some slack -- serious science has only been going at this problem a few hundred years and yet it is already piecing together million-year-old puzzle pieces.

However, we do have through geology a very clear idea of what chemicals were around in primordial Earth and what the general conditions where.

There are a multitude of experiments you can conduct using nothing but known chemicals present in early Earth along with known environmental conditions (really hot temperatures from lava ... lightning ... a water cycle ... etc) and get major building blocks of biological life from nothing. The most famous such experiment is Miller-Urey. Similar experiments have yielded proteins used in DNA replication out of nothing, a primitive phospholipid bilayer, and various other organic bits and pieces. And this is stuff you can replicate yourself at home in a matter of days to weeks (SCIENCE!). Earth had BILLIONS of years to work with.

You can ascribe religious origins if you wish, but a literal interpretation of the Bible (10,000 years old) is pretty thoroughly blown away by carbon dating, the fossil record, geology, chemistry ... and in particular their intersection with astronomy: http://www.universetoday.com/15575/how-o...ar-system/

We get into a much larger can of worms if you offer that The Bible is in fact NOT the infallible word of God, so I'll spare everyone continuing to go in this direction.

(09-14-2014 09:58 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:28 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

GTS - I'm not looking to debate. I am curious as to your general thoughts on how we all got here.

There is an abundance of evidence showing the classical biology "tree of life" with species/classifications/groups/etc all branching off from a single source and branching and branching. The fossil record isn't complete by any means ... but it, along with DNA, already paints a pretty vivid picture of the tree of life. Where science lacks direct evidence is the first step where something became able to replicate itself from nothing. And hey -- cut science some slack -- serious science has only been going at this problem a few hundred years and yet it is already piecing together million-year-old puzzle pieces.

However, we do have through geology a very clear idea of what chemicals were around in primordial Earth and what the general conditions where.

There are a multitude of experiments you can conduct using nothing but known chemicals present in early Earth along with known environmental conditions (really hot temperatures from lava ... lightning ... a water cycle ... etc) and get major building blocks of biological life from nothing. The most famous such experiment is Miller-Urey. Similar experiments have yielded proteins used in DNA replication out of nothing, a primitive phospholipid bilayer, and various other organic bits and pieces. And this is stuff you can replicate yourself at home in a matter of days to weeks (SCIENCE!). Earth had BILLIONS of years to work with.

You can ascribe religious origins if you wish, but a literal interpretation of the Bible (10,000 years old) is pretty thoroughly blown away by carbon dating, the fossil record, geology, chemistry ... and in particular their intersection with astronomy: http://www.universetoday.com/15575/how-o...ar-system/

We get into a much larger can of worms if you offer that The Bible is in fact NOT the infallible word of God, so I'll spare everyone continuing to go in this direction.

Translation ==>

(09-14-2014 09:58 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:28 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

GTS - I'm not looking to debate. I am curious as to your general thoughts on how we all got here.

There is an abundance of evidence showing the classical biology "tree of life" with species/classifications/groups/etc all branching off from a single source and branching and branching. The fossil record isn't complete by any means ... but it, along with DNA, already paints a pretty vivid picture of the tree of life. Where science lacks direct evidence is the first step where something became able to replicate itself from nothing. And hey -- cut science some slack -- serious science has only been going at this problem a few hundred years and yet it is already piecing together million-year-old puzzle pieces.

However, we do have through geology a very clear idea of what chemicals were around in primordial Earth and what the general conditions where.

There are a multitude of experiments you can conduct using nothing but known chemicals present in early Earth along with known environmental conditions (really hot temperatures from lava ... lightning ... a water cycle ... etc) and get major building blocks of biological life from nothing. The most famous such experiment is Miller-Urey. Similar experiments have yielded proteins used in DNA replication out of nothing, a primitive phospholipid bilayer, and various other organic bits and pieces. And this is stuff you can replicate yourself at home in a matter of days to weeks (SCIENCE!). Earth had BILLIONS of years to work with.

You can ascribe religious origins if you wish, but a literal interpretation of the Bible (10,000 years old) is pretty thoroughly blown away by carbon dating, the fossil record, geology, chemistry ... and in particular their intersection with astronomy: http://www.universetoday.com/15575/how-o...ar-system/

We get into a much larger can of worms if you offer that The Bible is in fact NOT the infallible word of God, so I'll spare everyone continuing to go in this direction.

Fair enough. I am with you through the chemistry.

The number of possible combinations of DNA make me unable to accept evolution though. The math doesn't work for me.

Then I see the way we are manipulating DNA in the lab. I tend to believe DNA is designed to be manipulated. It looks just like a computer language to me. "Who did it" is part of that much larger can of worms.

(09-14-2014 10:10 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]Fair enough. I am with you through the chemistry.

The number of possible combinations of DNA make me unable to accept evolution though. The math doesn't work for me.

Then I see the way we are manipulating DNA in the lab. I tend to believe DNA is designed to be manipulated. It looks just like a computer language to me. "Who did it" is part of that much larger can of worms.

You should pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" and read the chapter on "Climbing Mt. Impossible". Richard Dawkins after all isn't a professional atheist. He is a professional evolutionary biologist. And he goes VERY in depth into your qualm and far deeper still than just the -- quite legitimate I might add -- awe you see in DNA.

(09-14-2014 10:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:10 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]Fair enough. I am with you through the chemistry.

The number of possible combinations of DNA make me unable to accept evolution though. The math doesn't work for me.

Then I see the way we are manipulating DNA in the lab. I tend to believe DNA is designed to be manipulated. It looks just like a computer language to me. "Who did it" is part of that much larger can of worms.

You should pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" and read the chapter on "Climbing Mt. Impossible". Richard Dawkins after all isn't a professional atheist. He is a professional evolutionary biologist. And he goes VERY in depth into your qualm and far deeper still than just the -- quite legitimate I might add -- awe you see in DNA.

Maybe I'll do that. I've never heard any basic precept likely to change my mind though.

Go to the grocery store and try to buy something that hasn't been genetically modified either through breeding or genetic modification. You can't.

Breeding and DNA manipulation are such basic biological methods that I find the assumption that humans are the first to do them rather self-aggrandizing. Once you remove that assumption...

(09-14-2014 10:43 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:10 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]Fair enough. I am with you through the chemistry.

The number of possible combinations of DNA make me unable to accept evolution though. The math doesn't work for me.

Then I see the way we are manipulating DNA in the lab. I tend to believe DNA is designed to be manipulated. It looks just like a computer language to me. "Who did it" is part of that much larger can of worms.

You should pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" and read the chapter on "Climbing Mt. Impossible". Richard Dawkins after all isn't a professional atheist. He is a professional evolutionary biologist. And he goes VERY in depth into your qualm and far deeper still than just the -- quite legitimate I might add -- awe you see in DNA.

Maybe I'll do that. I've never heard any basic precept likely to change my mind though.

Go to the grocery store and try to buy something that hasn't been genetically modified either through breeding or genetic modification. You can't.

Breeding and DNA manipulation are such basic biological methods that I find the assumption that humans are the first to do them rather self-aggrandizing. Once you remove that assumption...

there's a big difference between breeding and genetic modification. But to address your point. Ants have been using antibiotics for the last 250 million years. Humans only started doing that in the last 50.

(09-14-2014 09:58 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:28 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]I was raised Christian ... including going to church every Sunday. But when I reached a certain age, it was my choice to continue going. I declined, as I was already skeptical with the disconnect between the preacher and reality. Then I read the Bible ... and that killed off my belief in organized religion VERY quickly. Then I read "The God Delusion", and that slammed the door shut on God altogether.

GTS - I'm not looking to debate. I am curious as to your general thoughts on how we all got here.

There is an abundance of evidence showing the classical biology "tree of life" with species/classifications/groups/etc all branching off from a single source and branching and branching. The fossil record isn't complete by any means ... but it, along with DNA, already paints a pretty vivid picture of the tree of life. Where science lacks direct evidence is the first step where something became able to replicate itself from nothing. And hey -- cut science some slack -- serious science has only been going at this problem a few hundred years and yet it is already piecing together million-year-old puzzle pieces.

However, we do have through geology a very clear idea of what chemicals were around in primordial Earth and what the general conditions where.

There are a multitude of experiments you can conduct using nothing but known chemicals present in early Earth along with known environmental conditions (really hot temperatures from lava ... lightning ... a water cycle ... etc) and get major building blocks of biological life from nothing. The most famous such experiment is Miller-Urey. Similar experiments have yielded proteins used in DNA replication out of nothing, a primitive phospholipid bilayer, and various other organic bits and pieces. And this is stuff you can replicate yourself at home in a matter of days to weeks (SCIENCE!). Earth had BILLIONS of years to work with.

You can ascribe religious origins if you wish, but a literal interpretation of the Bible (10,000 years old) is pretty thoroughly blown away by carbon dating, the fossil record, geology, chemistry ... and in particular their intersection with astronomy: http://www.universetoday.com/15575/how-o...ar-system/

We get into a much larger can of worms if you offer that The Bible is in fact NOT the infallible word of God, so I'll spare everyone continuing to go in this direction.

The problem I see with this scenario that you use to give weight to how chemicals could have come together on their own to create building blocks of life is that nothing you said above, gives any credence to this.

The example you gave was about using "experiments" to show how this could have occurred. But, experiments involve intelligent individuals manipulating things.

Life coming into existence on its own, without some intelligence manipulating things, so it can occur, defies all rational probability.

As far as the Bible and fundamentalism based on a juridical God, it is only primarily Westernized Christianity and Scholasticism (a relatively new branch of Biblical interpretation, considering the time within a couple hundred years prior to and since the reformation versus the entire time since Jesus) that espouses this. Eastern Christianity does not.

(09-14-2014 10:46 PM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:43 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:10 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]Fair enough. I am with you through the chemistry.

The number of possible combinations of DNA make me unable to accept evolution though. The math doesn't work for me.

Then I see the way we are manipulating DNA in the lab. I tend to believe DNA is designed to be manipulated. It looks just like a computer language to me. "Who did it" is part of that much larger can of worms.

You should pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" and read the chapter on "Climbing Mt. Impossible". Richard Dawkins after all isn't a professional atheist. He is a professional evolutionary biologist. And he goes VERY in depth into your qualm and far deeper still than just the -- quite legitimate I might add -- awe you see in DNA.

Maybe I'll do that. I've never heard any basic precept likely to change my mind though.

Go to the grocery store and try to buy something that hasn't been genetically modified either through breeding or genetic modification. You can't.

Breeding and DNA manipulation are such basic biological methods that I find the assumption that humans are the first to do them rather self-aggrandizing. Once you remove that assumption...

there's a big difference between breeding and genetic modification. But to address your point. Ants have been using antibiotics for the last 250 million years. Humans only started doing that in the last 50.

So, perhaps one ant colony engineered humans to go over and kick over the anthills of their rival colonies?

(09-14-2014 10:50 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:46 PM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:43 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:10 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]Fair enough. I am with you through the chemistry.

The number of possible combinations of DNA make me unable to accept evolution though. The math doesn't work for me.

Then I see the way we are manipulating DNA in the lab. I tend to believe DNA is designed to be manipulated. It looks just like a computer language to me. "Who did it" is part of that much larger can of worms.

You should pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" and read the chapter on "Climbing Mt. Impossible". Richard Dawkins after all isn't a professional atheist. He is a professional evolutionary biologist. And he goes VERY in depth into your qualm and far deeper still than just the -- quite legitimate I might add -- awe you see in DNA.

Maybe I'll do that. I've never heard any basic precept likely to change my mind though.

Go to the grocery store and try to buy something that hasn't been genetically modified either through breeding or genetic modification. You can't.

Breeding and DNA manipulation are such basic biological methods that I find the assumption that humans are the first to do them rather self-aggrandizing. Once you remove that assumption...

there's a big difference between breeding and genetic modification. But to address your point. Ants have been using antibiotics for the last 250 million years. Humans only started doing that in the last 50.

So, perhaps one ant colony engineered humans to go over and kick over the anthills of their rival colonies?

maybe..maybe not. But I hope that's not the case because I don't want to go to ant hell as punishment for all the ants i've killed.

(09-14-2014 10:52 PM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:50 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:46 PM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:43 PM)Claw Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-14-2014 10:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]You should pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" and read the chapter on "Climbing Mt. Impossible". Richard Dawkins after all isn't a professional atheist. He is a professional evolutionary biologist. And he goes VERY in depth into your qualm and far deeper still than just the -- quite legitimate I might add -- awe you see in DNA.

Maybe I'll do that. I've never heard any basic precept likely to change my mind though.

Go to the grocery store and try to buy something that hasn't been genetically modified either through breeding or genetic modification. You can't.

Breeding and DNA manipulation are such basic biological methods that I find the assumption that humans are the first to do them rather self-aggrandizing. Once you remove that assumption...

there's a big difference between breeding and genetic modification. But to address your point. Ants have been using antibiotics for the last 250 million years. Humans only started doing that in the last 50.

So, perhaps one ant colony engineered humans to go over and kick over the anthills of their rival colonies?

maybe..maybe not. But I hope that's not the case because I don't want to go to ant hell as punishment for all the ants i've killed.

I am in tears. LOL!!!

(09-14-2014 09:58 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: [ -> ]Where science lacks direct evidence is the first step where something became able to replicate itself from nothing.

Well, what's a minor detail among friends?

Quote:a literal interpretation of the Bible (10,000 years old) is pretty thoroughly blown away

I know there are a lot of people (both those who "believe in the Bible" and those who don't) who think the Bible says that the world is 10,000 years old, or some other exact # of years. But actually that's not true. The Bible simply does not address that point in any way shape or form, anymore than it addresses the Eagles/Colts game tomorrow night.